Recently I had a conversation with a friend that revolved around date rape. It started because of a post that quoted a description of one. The commenters on this post said that a woman should have the benefit of the doubt in a he said/she said situation. When my friend mentioned that she might be lying - for whatever reason - she was attacked because, some implied, women never lie about such a thing. Why would they? The rape investigation and subsequent trial (if the case goes to trial) would be too humiliating to the woman. She would be forced to tell the world of her sexual history and the defense would paint her to be a tramp. No woman would want to put themselves through that. Right?
Should women be given the benefit of the doubt in he said/she said situations, where there is no other evidence of a rape? Should the accused automatically be presumed guilty when the accusation is date rape?
To be fair, I will admit that the situation described was rape. The victim admits to repeatedly saying “no”. She says that she wasn’t traumatized, but admits
[...]I remember that sexual experience a little more vividly than most of the consensual sexual experiences I’ve undergone in a similar state of intoxication[...][read it here]
*I would say that she was indeed effected negatively by the experience, though maybe not to the PTSD stage.
She didn’t file charges though. The fact is she can’t actually prove the rape- there is no evidence. Should a judge and jury have automatically assumed she is telling the truth about what happened to her?
The fact is that there have been incidents of women lying about rape. Some of the reasons for their lies could be that they were seeking revenge, trying to hide their culpability in something, trying to divert attention from something else, or simply because they couldn’t remember who attacked them. There are women that see nothing wrong with their past sexual exploits- and I don’t see why they should to be completely honest. Some of those women happen to be emotionally/mentally unstable and think nothing of bringing an innocent man in front of a jury and accusing him of rape. They are not humiliated by the process, and some may actually enjoy it.
In my comment I used women “suffering” from Münchhausen’s Syndrome by Proxy. These women harm and even kill their children so that they can gain attention and sympathy. Why would anyone think that there aren’t some women that would do the same with regards to accusing someone of rape? Because they don’t want to believe that women can stoop to those levels.
Women can indeed be mentally unbalanced and that should be recognized as far as I’m concerned. Women can be evil and cruel. Men can be victims of these women- as well as vicious predators. I don’t think it’s right to assume either gender is guilty of one or the other straight off the bat. Men have historically been given the upper hand in an investigation/trial, or I should say white men because black men have historically been not so lucky when accused of rape, but that doesn’t mean that the tables should turn automatically and the accused be sent to jail.
So what to do in situations of date rape? I honestly don’t know. I would say that a woman shouldn’t put herself in that kind of situation and I’m sure I would get beat down for it. At the same time I could say that men should stay out of sexual situations where there isn’t coherent, absolute consent. In an ideal world both sexes would respect and honor each other and there would never be rapes, false accusations, or anything in between. We don’t live in that world though, so what do we do? I’ve personally learned self-defense and have stopped going to bars. I’ve got a healthy fear of dark streets, alleys, and cars of men I don’t know. I don’t assume that men are going to leave me alone just because they should. I don’t assume that I can go into a high-crime area and come out with my purse because it’s wrong to steal and because I have a right to feel safe. Yes, I have a right to feel and be safe, but that’s not reality. Reality is that it’s a dangerous world out there, especially for women. And we’ve got to learn to be responsible for our own safety.
Am I saying that it’s a woman’s fault if she’s raped? No, of course not. But I’m sure it will be taken that way (whenever high crime and responsibility are mentioned along side of “woman” someone always accuses the speaker/writer of “blaming the victim”). I am blaming the men who feel entitled to a woman’s body for whatever reason and take it upon themselves to have it. I am blaming the women who lie about what happened. Those women hurt real victims of rape more than anything else. I am blaming a society that raises men and women to be the way they are, without the ability to be responsible and/or with no regard to their fellow human being. That fucking sucks. But, guess what, you can’t get around it. Anywhere. So you deal. As a woman you learn not to go into certain situations, you learn to kick and scream and not get so drunk as to be unable to even move (obviously drugged drinks are a whole other story, but this is a situation with which I’m personally familiar and from which I’ve learned a grave lesson).
Should a woman report a date rape? Absolutely. And she should insist on a thorough, in-depth investigation. That should be respected by law enforcement, of course. But if there are no charges brought because there is no evidence of a crime, there is nothing more to be done. That’s called reality and it sucks donkey balls. You cannot throw a man in jail for decades with no other evidence than a vague memory. That’s just wrong.
Your turn.
Popularity: 12% [?]
Sphere: Related Content
Site Tags: date-rape, false-accusations, trauma
Technorati Tags: date-rape, false-accusations, trauma
Powered by FireStats
15 Comments
Did the Duke University case come up in this discussion at all? When the “victim” was investigated, there were cries of “blaming the victim” all around, but it turned out that her pants were, indeed, on fire. And every other time the evidence points to the man’s innocence, there are always those who say he beat the rap because he was favored.
I’m sure that’s true SOMETIMES, but I’d say that if there is a bias, it’s not natonwide. It will depend a lot on the judge and the lawyers involved.
I remember reading a few years ago about a case where a couple were having consensual sex and the woman changed her mind. She asked him to stop and it took him 30 seconds to do so, and he was thus CONVICTED of rape.
Now, this may be unromantic, but sometimes in the midst of sex, people can get really into it, you know? This isn’t meant to be an intellectual exercise, after all. Sometimes we might go to the “happy place”. On occasion your partner might start reciting The Bells by Poe and not be noticed doing so for 30 seconds. I think she definitely got the benefit of the doubt on that one, and he got the shaft.
Well, you’ve said it all, and I agree with every word, so uh . . . What’s left? Oh, I know! If a female I know personally (or online) says that she was date-raped, I will offer my utmost sympathy, and even if I’m suspicious of the circumstances, I will not let on. But if I’m on a jury? No way would I vote guilty just on the word of a stranger with no other evidence. That’s as bad as when people took a man’s word over a woman’s just because. Plus in our society it just isn’t true that a girl or woman is necessarily humiliated and stigmatized if she says she was raped. No presumption of guilt, unless it can be shown that he’s done it before. Then I might start believing it. Is that allowed, do you know? They can no longer bring in an alleged victim’s sexual history, right? But can they bring in the accused’s priors?
I would find it very dangerous to just believe a woman who said she was raped and disbelieve the man. There are many reasons a woman could ’stitch up’ the man and there are plenty of women out there who have done it.
I do not know how you can find the right decision in a ‘he’s word against hers’ stale mate, it is a real problem.
Right or wrong, our system of justice is innocent until proven guilty. This means that if the only evidence to date rape or any crime is the word of one person and none of those statements can be coroborated, then the accused goes free. That’s just the way it works. That probably means guys that rape women might not get convicted if there’s not enough evidence. It also means guys that are innocent don’t get sent to jail.
I agree that PEOPLE need to be smart and aware of their surroundings to try and stay out of trouble.
“But can they bring in the accused’s priors?”
Not in grand jury, where you get your indictment. We are never told of any priors. If the target is charged with “Possession of a Firearm by a Felon”, we will hear testimony that the target was convicted of a felony within the past ten years, but we will not be told what that felony was under any circumstances. We are to judge each case on it’s present merits alone.
Of course, there will still be indictments handed down. I know that the panel I’m on is much more picky and detail oriented than they were when we began. There is one case I could REALLY point out as an example, but doing so would be flirting with contempt so I will not. Suffice it to say that I still don’t think that guy should have been indicted, and now a few of them who voted for it agree with me in retrospect.
I think with the current climate, there is a bias toward women right now. No doubt about that. I’m not so sure about women of color or women who are/have been involved with men of different races, though. Celebrity men are also usually given the benefit of the doubt.
I don’t think that rape should include mid-penetration “No, I change my mind.” She said yes initially, how many more times is he supposed to ask? That doesn’t even make sense to me. Of course, there are certain radicals that will say that she can say “no” whenever she wants and too bad so sad for him. I don’t think that’s right or fair. And that guy really got the shaft.
I think that in the cases of violent assault, if the accused has admitted to or been convicted of another violent act, that should be admitted. I think it would be completely relevant for the purpose of showing a pattern of behavior. And if it was he said/she said situation where the male has previously been convicted of rape, then she should get the benefit of the doubt (simply because he’s shown that he’s capable of the rape).
I agree with everything else you said.
I agree. I don’t think it’s safe to believe someone based on gender, because women are just as capable of lying. I don’t really think anything can be done in situations with no clear evidence, no witnesses, etc.
Women are more likely to be victims of rape and other violent crimes. As a woman who’s survived my share of violence, and who’s older female relatives have also survived various acts of violence against their person, by men I am more aware of what can happen to me when I put myself in certain situations. I’m 5 ft. 1, so I’m not really intimidating so I’m more likely than some man who’s 6 ft. to be a victim of a violent crime.
Unfortunately, there have been plenty of men that have been wrongfully convicted and have spent decades, and in some cases the remainder, of their lives behind bars- only to have DNA exonerate them. Luckily, DNA will prevent this from happening so often now, but still…
Also, men that commit one rape are more likely to commit another. So, if he doesn’t get caught and/or convicted the first time, he’s likely to get it a subsequent time. Murphy’s Law applies.
The Grand Jury in my town will always hand down an indictment. What’s that thing they say on “Law
It is already a proven fact that eyewitness account is not worth shit. For one to go on eyewitness testimony is crap.
It is a hard and tough situation, as you have some people out their, who stand by their own account of the rape, but are too distraught, confused to provide accurate and valid details, but you also have those in which are vindictive, and downright snakes.
One can only go on the facts…the facts being dna, alibi, evidence, and previous behavior.
I read about the guy being freed after serving all those years in prison for a rape he did not commit.
It is a shame. I wonder why, our law, in regards to consequences and sentences aren’t more mandated…in too many states, a crime can command a lengthy sentence, whereas in another a shorter one.
I believe that there should be stricter guidelines, regulations and law regarding sentencing…as it is just unfair in most cases throughout the country.
But then, again, we are all human, and human err is unavoidable in law.
their=there
heehee!
“I don’t think it’s right to assume either gender is guilty of one or the other straight off the bat. ”
I completely agree. Though it’s far from perfect, the ‘benefit of the doubt’ methodology is the best one we’ve got, and you can’t suspend it for rape and for no other crime.
I couldn’t agree with you more. You are RIGHT ON.
Well, howdy-do, sir. And thanks.